House voted this morning to delay Obamacare for one full year
- Thread starter The Boys
- Start date
opcorn2
- Feb 23, 2005
- 6,744
- 129
- 63
The house voted not to fund it, they can't delay it or defund it legally. It is already a law. The Senate will not vote the same way and even if they did, your totally awesome president will veto it. The house is a republican majority so this is no surprise.
They, the house republicans, are trying everything they can to ruin government they are scared to death that it may actually work. That is the only reason they don't want it funded. They can't repeal it so they try to shut down government. It's ridiculous and an out and out travesty.
They, the house republicans, are trying everything they can to ruin government they are scared to death that it may actually work. That is the only reason they don't want it funded. They can't repeal it so they try to shut down government. It's ridiculous and an out and out travesty.
I disagree. With this vote the House has accepted that Obamacare is inevitable, they are asking to delay it a year in hopes that it can be made "less bad" for that American public, a majority of which do not even want it.
How is this not a compromise? It's the Senate and your wonderful leader who will not negotiate some of the awfulness out of this "law".
The Senate is the one who would rather take the day off today than actually come in and work on a way to keep gov't and it's employees working Tuesday morning.
Both sides are to blame, but in this case the Senate holds the majority of blame. Basically the House has said we know it's inevitable that you are gonna fuck us in the ass and we accept it, can we at least negotiate how many inches deep you go? The Senate responds by saying it's balls deep, no negotiation.
When was the last thing the government actually made better :shrug: Mail service sucks, Medicare is a debacle...it's the free market that should be first and foremost driver for every good and service, not the government
First of all the House has held 42 votes already, trying to repeal it. That isn't going to work, that is wasting the taxpayers time and money. The majority of Americans do to want Health Care. Anybody can make statements about what Americans want. The fact is that nobody truly knows what the country wants. What exactly makes you think that House Republicans will work to make a single thing that has the President's name on it better? Name me one piece of legislation they have put forth so far to do that? Defunding the government isn't trying to make a damn thing better. They want to make things worse, as bad as they possibly can, in order to make the President look bad. If you honestly think a single house republican has done a single thing in the last six years to make our lives better than you and I will just have to disagree on this because it just isn't a fact. The GOP only serves the wealthy and by my measure, nobody here is truly wealthy.
Secondly, the Affordable Care Act is a law. You cannot suspend a law, you have to repeal it. They are trying to "suspend" it for one simple reason. They know once it is in place, the country will very likely appreciate it. Also, if they suspend it, it is very likely that someone will sue the government. If someone's Mother dies because she was denied treatment, when there is a law stating that she was supposed to have insurance, big troubles ahead.
So the House says, let's take a year and fix this, your words not mine as I think the house republicans are only trying to stop anything the President does. How exactly do you fix something that has never run? What the hell is so hard about saying, this country needs health care, here is the plan, if it doesn't work then fix it or repeal it. It's a fairly easy concept.
Hedge,
My advice to you is to move to a country that doesn't have all those bad systems then. You have zero idea what the fuck you are talking about. When did you go on Medicare? I get my mail every day without a hitch. The government made your entire existence in this country possible and you just can't help yourself from bitching. You and I don't need to discuss politics because you are a typical republican parrot. You rarely put any thought whatsoever into the things you say and just echo whatever you heard on the Limbaugh and Beck bullshit shows. Just saying things doesn't make them valid.
Secondly, the Affordable Care Act is a law. You cannot suspend a law, you have to repeal it. They are trying to "suspend" it for one simple reason. They know once it is in place, the country will very likely appreciate it. Also, if they suspend it, it is very likely that someone will sue the government. If someone's Mother dies because she was denied treatment, when there is a law stating that she was supposed to have insurance, big troubles ahead.
So the House says, let's take a year and fix this, your words not mine as I think the house republicans are only trying to stop anything the President does. How exactly do you fix something that has never run? What the hell is so hard about saying, this country needs health care, here is the plan, if it doesn't work then fix it or repeal it. It's a fairly easy concept.
Hedge,
My advice to you is to move to a country that doesn't have all those bad systems then. You have zero idea what the fuck you are talking about. When did you go on Medicare? I get my mail every day without a hitch. The government made your entire existence in this country possible and you just can't help yourself from bitching. You and I don't need to discuss politics because you are a typical republican parrot. You rarely put any thought whatsoever into the things you say and just echo whatever you heard on the Limbaugh and Beck bullshit shows. Just saying things doesn't make them valid.
Health Care.
Putting money in the hands of the wealthy is the best way to deal with services? Yes, because historically, the wealthy have always been the most giving sort. Capitalism is not a form of government hedge, please, for the love of God, read up on what democracy and capitalism are. The free market is the entire reason we had to have the ACA, are you fucking kidding me. Think about what you said, so the free market should drive goods and services. So we should have Fire Departments and Police and Military and the health and welfare of our senior citizens run and decided by the person that makes the most money at it? Good grief dude, that is just fucking stupid.
House Republicans spent hours on Capitol Hill Saturday as a government shutdown loomed, but that didn't stop some of them from having a little weekend fun.
Reporters tweeted that they could see -- and smell -- several Congressmen enjoying a drink while working:
.........................................................................
how do they get away with this
and Boehner leading the way with a whiskey in his hand.
for the good of America
Reporters tweeted that they could see -- and smell -- several Congressmen enjoying a drink while working:
.........................................................................
how do they get away with this
and Boehner leading the way with a whiskey in his hand.
for the good of America
I have no idea how you can say this. You really think the only people in the country that are against this economy killer are the handful of House Republicans?
Do you honestly believe (take off political glasses) that this isn't driving up the cost of healthcare for people? You can blame the insurance companies all you want, the fact is the ACA is the driving force behind them raising rates. To deny that is just toeing party lines.
Yes, I do believe House Republicans are trying to delay Obamacare not in an effort to make it better, I agree they have no interest in helping out BHO, but they do want to make it less bad for the people it's going to affect.
I got a first peek at out benefits package, $3250 is what I will pay more next year out of pocket when it comes to deductibles, premiums and prescriptions my family already takes.
You think that isn't affecting me? Really? All for what, so some minimum wage worker in California cane get a Gov't subsidy and only have to pay $52 a month for better care than my family will get?
Fuck that. That guy on minimum wage probably doesn't have the $52 a month to spend anyway. How about fixing that problem instead of raping that working man?
Pengy,
I do not thing that the ACA is forcing them to drive up rates because the thing hasn't even been enacted yet so how can it? I think the ACA provided them with an excuse to drive up their rates and get away with it by pointing the finger at the ACA. All rates are based on pure speculation when you get right down to it because how can anyone know what something is going to cost if it is never in place.
My problem is entirely with the misleading of our nation. Anyone that thinks the health care system we have in place is working has never been without insurance and gotten ill. They must have never seen a family member denied care because the medicare/medicaid that they worked there entire life for didn't cover it. We have an insurance problem in this country and anyone that thinks differently is simply not paying attention.
I am not digging that your costs are going up, of course not. You're one of my faves on here so why would I want to see any hardship come your way, but I also think there are some ways to remedy that cost to you in the future. What I don't think is that we should continue on with the status quo because society is afraid to make a change. There is absolutely no way to fix it with one fell swoop, it has to be done piecemeal. So if it is indeed the case where a certain societal class bears an unfair brunt then we address it.
There is absolutely no way that the shutting down of government in order to prove a point is ever a good thing. The kinks can and will be worked out but not before we can lay it out and identify.
In answer to your question, I firmly believe that the ACA is a good program and will ultimately be accepted and enjoyed by the entire country.
One thing you said is that they, and I am assuming you mean the House Republicans, are trying to make it better or less of a hardship for the working people. What exactly have they ever proposed to make it better other than repealing it? There hasn't been a single piece of legislation put forward in five years by Republicans that attempts to remedy anything whatsoever in the ACA so how exactly are they trying to make it better. Also do you really think that if the House Republicans are successful that the insurance companies are going to go back to business as usual or lower your rates? Fuck no, they will raise them or keep the ACA rates in place no matter what. It isn't health care costs that are out of control, it is insurance companies, drug companies, and providers that are driving up health care, denying coverage and their greed has finally put them directly in the cross hairs. BCBS and the rest of them could all have done something about it, they could have forgone record profits for thirty years in order to make coverage affordable for everyone, they chose not to. I fail to see the reasoning behind any attempt to keep things as they are. We pay more for health care in this country than all of Europe combined and people think that is right? Are you kidding me? It is all about the greed greed greed bro. That is it.
Last edited:
FDC:
After seeing a whole bunch of your opining on the ACA - without any real understanding of the bill or the workings of health insurance - I just had to jump in here. Many times you add insightful comments that I enjoy on other topics and do come off as well educated, but on a topic such as the ACA you come off as the 2014 version of Cliff Claven.
The rates that are being "driven up" are for 2014, when the ACA will be enacted. Your comment sounds like you think insurance companies should wait a year, lose their ass, and then adjust rates.
Of course the ACA is causing insurance companies to increase rates. There are many significant shifts that will occur to the risk pool in 2014. Most of them are concentrated in the Individual market (non-group). Up till now, people were rated based on their health status when they were issued. Healthy people got good rates, non healthy not as good. Yes, people got denied when they had pre-existing conditions. But on the other hand, people got much better rates when they were healthy and responsible. Now, companies cannot differentiate anymore - meaning that the healthy folks will be discriminated against for their healthy lifestyles and have to pay for those who do not have healthy lifestyles. FWIW - 70% of health claims are tied to lifestyle. Many people do not have healthy lifestyles - the vast majority in the US. They drink, smoke, don't eat right, gamble, etc. OK, I'm kidding on the gambling one. But many of the people that have not had insurance for years (or ever) will be coming into the system. They will have pent up demand - and will be using their new insurance card often. How many folks do you know that aren't on some time of prescription? Think of all the people of working age that are not working (and getting group insurance through their employer). Why are they not working? One of 2 reasons: 1) lazy and living off the government, which is a small percentage and 2) those who are too sick/disabled to work - and all those people will be joining up for the free insurance (via subsidies). They are not as healthy as the working population - which is pretty easy to understand.
More importantly, it is important to understand that insurance companies only make 3-4% pre-tax profit margins. This is a byproduct of the ACA. There aren't many industries out there with as low a figure (check out Apple at over 35%). Now, hospitals, Pharma, and RX - where the real costs are - that is a different story, but your President gave them all a free pass to get this ACA bill passed.
You may think premium rates are "based on speculation", but that's because you don't understand and are a cynic. That's ok, I don't understand how a big airplane gets into the air, but I get on one anyway. What I don't do is pretend I am an expert on the topic and say that airline companies are out to screw us or "they have a bunch of birds that lift the plane in the air". If I don't understand something that it technical in nature, I try not to opine on it. But the ACA, and it's effect on the small group, large group, and Individual marketplaces I do understand, so I don't mind sharing information.
Companies don't want to overprice their product - it is not in their best interest to do so. You may have heard of the MLR regulation - where companies have to spend 80-85% of premium on healthcare claims. See, if companies overprice, they have to give that money back to the consumers. But the companies will have already paid agent commissions on that money - so they will have less to pay back than they took in. No way any company wants to price too high - it will cost them more in the long run. There is no advantage to overpricing - it will result in more being paid back and less customers.
Premiums are inflated by the insurance company tax (Obama), reinsurance tax, health exchange tax, medical device tax - these all get passed to the consumer. These didn't exist prior to the ACA. Somehow, they had to get more money to pay for all of those folks (single people up to $45K in income) who get subsidies.
There are also other taxes - an additional 5% on capital gains and an additional 0.9% medicare to those couples who are productive and are in the upper middle class or higher.
Not only, as I mentioned, is the risk pool going to be worse, but we are surcharging the healthy - by saying we have to charge them as much as the "sick". Obama made a big error in saying that premiums could be higher for only smokers - he should have also allowed them to be higher for those overweight/obese. Weight is something that everyone can control and accounts for more medical costs than smoking in total - it is not even close. Think HBP medications, diabetics, etc.
FYI - there are many reasons why we pay more for health care than Europe. Been to Europe lately? See all the fat people like we have in the US? Naw, I didnt' think so. Does Europeans pay the same amount for prescription drugs? No, they pay a fraction of what we do. Why? As part of the ACA, they had an amendment to allow re-importation of Rx drugs, so we could pay the same price as Europe. Why did it fail? Obama put the word out to the Dems that he made a backroom deal with Pharma that he would not allow a bill such as that to pass, to ensure he had Pharma support on the ACA. Doctors get paid much less in Europe than in the US. Hospitals don't make as much their either.
Like I said, insurance companies make 3-4% profit - so I guess there is 3% that you could save. But 80-85% of our healthcare costs are hospitals/doctors/pharma - why in the hell didn't Obama do something to reduce those costs? Why? Because it was easy to bastardize insurance companies - who are disliked as much as unions these days. He was afraid to take on Pharma and the ADA - because then he'd lose his "signature" legislation. But Pharma has profit margins of 30% or so - which is pretty much all made in America, as other countries do not allow Rx to be marked up as much. Yes, leave them alone. Too funny.
Your blind support of Obama, along with your Clavin-like understanding of the health care law have colored your opinion. It's almost like you are the Democrat version of Hedgehog.
Before the ACA was passed, 85% of US citizens had health insurance, and polling indicated that people were happy with their health care insurance (but obviously not the cost). So what does Obama do? He refuses to put in rules to decrease the costs!
Of the 40M people that don't have health insurance today, they estimate that 25M will now to able to get it. Out of $300M people, that is an additional 8.3% that will get it, moving us from 85% to 93.3% covered. We still will have 6.7% that do not have insurance.
To go from 85% to 93%, and to increase costs on many folks significantly - was it worth it? The majority in this country say no - and this has been shown consistently in every poll taken since 2010.
If we truly were a country where the majority spoke - and since 85% had coverage and were happy - and every poll that comes out shows that we don't want the ACA - well, its clear that the country as a whole doesn't want this bill.
But the Dems didn't care - just ram it through. Disruption/Increased costs/more part time employees, etc to cover 8% more people, while jerking around the other 85%? Just dumb.
For people in the individual market, to calculate the cost of Obamacare on you, it is imperative to add all the pieces that Obama added onto your family: 1) compare your new premium to your old premium, with similiar plan designs (you can get very close in comparing a 2013 to a 2014 plan design), 2) add in the extra payroll taxes you pay that you would not being paying without the ACA, and 3) add in the extra capital gains taxes you will be paying if you have capital gains. The true amount of health care reform is staggering on individuals.
After seeing a whole bunch of your opining on the ACA - without any real understanding of the bill or the workings of health insurance - I just had to jump in here. Many times you add insightful comments that I enjoy on other topics and do come off as well educated, but on a topic such as the ACA you come off as the 2014 version of Cliff Claven.
The rates that are being "driven up" are for 2014, when the ACA will be enacted. Your comment sounds like you think insurance companies should wait a year, lose their ass, and then adjust rates.
Of course the ACA is causing insurance companies to increase rates. There are many significant shifts that will occur to the risk pool in 2014. Most of them are concentrated in the Individual market (non-group). Up till now, people were rated based on their health status when they were issued. Healthy people got good rates, non healthy not as good. Yes, people got denied when they had pre-existing conditions. But on the other hand, people got much better rates when they were healthy and responsible. Now, companies cannot differentiate anymore - meaning that the healthy folks will be discriminated against for their healthy lifestyles and have to pay for those who do not have healthy lifestyles. FWIW - 70% of health claims are tied to lifestyle. Many people do not have healthy lifestyles - the vast majority in the US. They drink, smoke, don't eat right, gamble, etc. OK, I'm kidding on the gambling one. But many of the people that have not had insurance for years (or ever) will be coming into the system. They will have pent up demand - and will be using their new insurance card often. How many folks do you know that aren't on some time of prescription? Think of all the people of working age that are not working (and getting group insurance through their employer). Why are they not working? One of 2 reasons: 1) lazy and living off the government, which is a small percentage and 2) those who are too sick/disabled to work - and all those people will be joining up for the free insurance (via subsidies). They are not as healthy as the working population - which is pretty easy to understand.
More importantly, it is important to understand that insurance companies only make 3-4% pre-tax profit margins. This is a byproduct of the ACA. There aren't many industries out there with as low a figure (check out Apple at over 35%). Now, hospitals, Pharma, and RX - where the real costs are - that is a different story, but your President gave them all a free pass to get this ACA bill passed.
You may think premium rates are "based on speculation", but that's because you don't understand and are a cynic. That's ok, I don't understand how a big airplane gets into the air, but I get on one anyway. What I don't do is pretend I am an expert on the topic and say that airline companies are out to screw us or "they have a bunch of birds that lift the plane in the air". If I don't understand something that it technical in nature, I try not to opine on it. But the ACA, and it's effect on the small group, large group, and Individual marketplaces I do understand, so I don't mind sharing information.
Companies don't want to overprice their product - it is not in their best interest to do so. You may have heard of the MLR regulation - where companies have to spend 80-85% of premium on healthcare claims. See, if companies overprice, they have to give that money back to the consumers. But the companies will have already paid agent commissions on that money - so they will have less to pay back than they took in. No way any company wants to price too high - it will cost them more in the long run. There is no advantage to overpricing - it will result in more being paid back and less customers.
Premiums are inflated by the insurance company tax (Obama), reinsurance tax, health exchange tax, medical device tax - these all get passed to the consumer. These didn't exist prior to the ACA. Somehow, they had to get more money to pay for all of those folks (single people up to $45K in income) who get subsidies.
There are also other taxes - an additional 5% on capital gains and an additional 0.9% medicare to those couples who are productive and are in the upper middle class or higher.
Not only, as I mentioned, is the risk pool going to be worse, but we are surcharging the healthy - by saying we have to charge them as much as the "sick". Obama made a big error in saying that premiums could be higher for only smokers - he should have also allowed them to be higher for those overweight/obese. Weight is something that everyone can control and accounts for more medical costs than smoking in total - it is not even close. Think HBP medications, diabetics, etc.
FYI - there are many reasons why we pay more for health care than Europe. Been to Europe lately? See all the fat people like we have in the US? Naw, I didnt' think so. Does Europeans pay the same amount for prescription drugs? No, they pay a fraction of what we do. Why? As part of the ACA, they had an amendment to allow re-importation of Rx drugs, so we could pay the same price as Europe. Why did it fail? Obama put the word out to the Dems that he made a backroom deal with Pharma that he would not allow a bill such as that to pass, to ensure he had Pharma support on the ACA. Doctors get paid much less in Europe than in the US. Hospitals don't make as much their either.
Like I said, insurance companies make 3-4% profit - so I guess there is 3% that you could save. But 80-85% of our healthcare costs are hospitals/doctors/pharma - why in the hell didn't Obama do something to reduce those costs? Why? Because it was easy to bastardize insurance companies - who are disliked as much as unions these days. He was afraid to take on Pharma and the ADA - because then he'd lose his "signature" legislation. But Pharma has profit margins of 30% or so - which is pretty much all made in America, as other countries do not allow Rx to be marked up as much. Yes, leave them alone. Too funny.
Your blind support of Obama, along with your Clavin-like understanding of the health care law have colored your opinion. It's almost like you are the Democrat version of Hedgehog.
Before the ACA was passed, 85% of US citizens had health insurance, and polling indicated that people were happy with their health care insurance (but obviously not the cost). So what does Obama do? He refuses to put in rules to decrease the costs!
Of the 40M people that don't have health insurance today, they estimate that 25M will now to able to get it. Out of $300M people, that is an additional 8.3% that will get it, moving us from 85% to 93.3% covered. We still will have 6.7% that do not have insurance.
To go from 85% to 93%, and to increase costs on many folks significantly - was it worth it? The majority in this country say no - and this has been shown consistently in every poll taken since 2010.
If we truly were a country where the majority spoke - and since 85% had coverage and were happy - and every poll that comes out shows that we don't want the ACA - well, its clear that the country as a whole doesn't want this bill.
But the Dems didn't care - just ram it through. Disruption/Increased costs/more part time employees, etc to cover 8% more people, while jerking around the other 85%? Just dumb.
For people in the individual market, to calculate the cost of Obamacare on you, it is imperative to add all the pieces that Obama added onto your family: 1) compare your new premium to your old premium, with similiar plan designs (you can get very close in comparing a 2013 to a 2014 plan design), 2) add in the extra payroll taxes you pay that you would not being paying without the ACA, and 3) add in the extra capital gains taxes you will be paying if you have capital gains. The true amount of health care reform is staggering on individuals.
Mags,
As Penguinfan was talking about his premiums going up next year and myself addressing hist statements and concerns, I mistakenly assumed most would understand that I was talking about future prices. I even went so far as to use the word speculation.
I did not and never even attempted to get into anything as deep as you did. You're right, I don't know as much as you apparently do about the subject. I am still allowed to express my thoughts on the matter as they relate to me.
I am all for making prescriptions and such cheaper. However it needs to be done is how it needs to be done. If I were in a position to change things I would hire people just like you to come in and give me all the information I needed, sans the unsolicited insults of course. Then I would formulate a plan and put it in place. The difference is that you think the Dems forced it down everyone's throats, yet it was a Republican plan originally. If someone has an idea then bring it forward, but no, the plan has to be killed in it's entirety without fail for a year without compromise. If not, we will shut this government down. You can call me what ever you want, I happen to like Cliff, I don't care. You won't change my mind and you won't ever convince me that Republicans are only thinking about the benefit if the American people. They have not passed one single good piece of legislature but instead made cuts to food stamps, Teachers, medicare, medicaid and fucking hot lunch programs.
As for you comparing me to Hedgehog, I really have no comment. I don't agree with hedgehog on anything politically. However, I have no personal issues with Scott and see no need to degrade or insult someone that has not done anything to me at present. Besides that, you seem to be enjoying yourself, so I don't want to stop anyone from having a good time.
Your post certainly shows that you are very well read on the subject of insurance. Unfortunately, your condescending attitude also shows you were not very well read by me. I won't make that mistake again.
Hope this helps,
FDC
As Penguinfan was talking about his premiums going up next year and myself addressing hist statements and concerns, I mistakenly assumed most would understand that I was talking about future prices. I even went so far as to use the word speculation.
I did not and never even attempted to get into anything as deep as you did. You're right, I don't know as much as you apparently do about the subject. I am still allowed to express my thoughts on the matter as they relate to me.
I am all for making prescriptions and such cheaper. However it needs to be done is how it needs to be done. If I were in a position to change things I would hire people just like you to come in and give me all the information I needed, sans the unsolicited insults of course. Then I would formulate a plan and put it in place. The difference is that you think the Dems forced it down everyone's throats, yet it was a Republican plan originally. If someone has an idea then bring it forward, but no, the plan has to be killed in it's entirety without fail for a year without compromise. If not, we will shut this government down. You can call me what ever you want, I happen to like Cliff, I don't care. You won't change my mind and you won't ever convince me that Republicans are only thinking about the benefit if the American people. They have not passed one single good piece of legislature but instead made cuts to food stamps, Teachers, medicare, medicaid and fucking hot lunch programs.
As for you comparing me to Hedgehog, I really have no comment. I don't agree with hedgehog on anything politically. However, I have no personal issues with Scott and see no need to degrade or insult someone that has not done anything to me at present. Besides that, you seem to be enjoying yourself, so I don't want to stop anyone from having a good time.
Your post certainly shows that you are very well read on the subject of insurance. Unfortunately, your condescending attitude also shows you were not very well read by me. I won't make that mistake again.
Hope this helps,
FDC
Like I said, he has some good information. Doesn't really have anything to do with what I was saying but whatever, it was a good show.
